Egypt's constitutional referendum: the untold story

By ignoring expressions of people power in the Egyptian constitutional referendum, some western
political commentators and the media are showing a disconnect with the pulse of
the citizenry and engaging in a dangerous politics of omission, argues Mariz
Tadros

While western policy analysts and “experts” were lamenting
the death
of democracy in Egypt, women took to the streets during the two days of
referendum over Egypt’s constitution, ululating, clapping
and challenging the red lines of female propriety by dancing in broad daylight in
public. Most western analysts and media have ejected from their accounts the occurrence of Egyptian women’s
spontaneous burst into singing and dancing across many polls in Egypt because
it is incongruent with their accounts of a country that has more or less lost
“positive” citizen agency since the ousting of President Morsi after the
military intervened.

It is interesting that when women challenged many social
conventions and norms in the Egyptian revolution of 2011 against President
Mubarak, it attracted much western attention. When women's participation
reached new heights - in the second revolution of June 2013 against President
Morsi - it was sidelined. When women take to the streets in unconventional displays
of agency, as they did in the constitutional referendum of 2014, they hardly
featured in western reports and media coverage. Undoubtedly what was happening
on the streets of Egypt during the two days of the constitutional referendum
was an expression of female agency, uninhibited and unrestrained by patriarchal
mores internalized through years of disciplining of what respectable women
should and should not do in public. However, no one considered that this may
possibly be an element of people power because these women were dancing and
singing to the tune of teslam al ayadi,
a song that was produced immediately after the 30th of June
revolution to celebrate the role of the military in ousting President
Morsi.

There is no examination of why the women who constituted the
biggest bloc of voters endorsing the Muslim Brotherhood-initiated constitution
also represent overwhelmingly the largest number of voters endorsing this
constitution. There is no examination of why women were responsive to el-Sisi’s
request that they participate in the revolution, nor why the level of animosity
that they harbour towards the Muslim Brothers has become so intense. By failing
to ask these questions, we are missing important signals for understanding
how people are thinking, what they are expecting, and why.

Critics would argue that these women out there to show their
support for the constitution have not even read the text of the
constitution. Certainly some of them
would not have, and they were there to show support for el-Sisi, more so than
a commitment to the constitution. However, if we were to read the constitution
through gender sensitive lens, women are conceivably some of its most notable
winners. For the first time ever, the constitution
stipulates that the state is committed to women holding public and senior
management offices in the state and their
appointment in judicial bodies and authorities without discrimination. For the
first time too the state commits to protect women from all forms of
violence(article 11). Article 180 sets a quarter of seats in the local
council for women, again for the first time ever. True the presence of article
2 which stipulates that Islam is the principle source of legislation can be
used by conservatives to undermine the idea of unqualified rights, however, any
removal of that article would have been met with complete opposition from large
segments of the constituent assembly. Article 93 stipulates the state’s
commitment to international conventions which is instrumental
for women’s rights in view of Egypt’s ratification of CEDAW, and will help leverage the constitutional premise for the state’s observance of women’s
rights.

From the very outset, the constitution-drawing process faced
a tension between inclusive processes and inclusive outcomes. The process was
shunned by the western media and the Muslim Brotherhood for not including the
latter. That the Muslim Brotherhood were not represented in the constituent
assembly is a flaw, however, negotiations were difficult from the outset
because the Muslim Brothers insisted that there can be no political solution
unless President Morsi is reinstated as President, which would have in effect
negated the will of the millions who had revolted against his rule. It is also
important to note that the constituent assembly did include the Al-Azhar, the
bastion of the Sunni world’s religious teaching, the Salafis as well as several
Islamist thinkers. By far, the constituent assembly this time round included
far greater representation of the political forces and orientations in the
country than the previous one. Let us not forget that Al Azhar, the Coptic
orthodox Church and various political parties and figures had pulled
out of the constitution drawing process of 2012.

In terms of inclusive outcomes, the constitution of 2013
does not fulfil the aspirations of the 25th January revolution. It also has problematic articles vis-à-vis the powers of the army (which
existed in the previous constitution as well). However, it goes much further in
recognizing the rights of women, youth and the Christian minority in the
country than the previous constitution.

What is being suggested here is that there is a politics of
omission that betrays a certain level of hypocrisy by western analysts and the
media in what constitutes inclusiveness, legitimacy and people power. For example, this constitutional referendum saw people’s
participation exceed 45% of those eligible to vote, far higher than the 30% who
participated under the Muslim Brotherhood-led government in 2012. Results show
an overwhelming positive endorsement for the constitution, estimated at over 90%, in a referendum
overseen by international and local observers. However, in press stories like
this one under the title “voters views” it has only one
perspective, one voice, that of a young woman who has decided to boycott
the elections unlike their coverage of the 2012 constitution which at least
present the pro-Muslim Brotherhood stance as well as opposing
perspectives.

The politics of omission become particularly conspicuous
when discussing the political environment in which the constitutional
referendum was playing out. Western attention has pointed, rightly so, to the fact
that the political opponents were denied the freedom to openly advocate a no
vote among the people and were subjected to police harassment. However, this
report and others
have failed to mention the violence
that voters have experienced in some parts of the country at the hands of
pro-Morsi factions. In the village of el Nahya in the governorate of Giza, the
Muslim Brotherhood actively blocked people’s access to the polling stations and
tried to burn the ballot
boxes, ending in clashes with the security. While such violence does not
absolve the security from the unrestrained force that they use against the
opposition, it does however, challenge the image of a brute police state
systematically cracking down at a peaceful group of protestors. This is but one
example.

There is no predicting whether Egypt will pursue a path of
democratization. The favourable endorsement of the constitution is not a signal
that things will necessarily get better, they are not a predictor of the mood
on the streets in future. However, when coverage of the constitutional
referendum becomes almost exclusively
focused on one segment of the population- the Muslim Brothers - and the
voices of millions is simply obscured from the narrative of what is going on,
it can only generate a disconnect from the pulse on the ground. Undoubtedly,
there is a need to press against majoritarian rule that negates the agency of a
political minority (the Brothers) and the intention here is not to justify
human rights abuses. However, the negation of the rest of the population’s
agency and people’s will only serve to make things worse: it creates the
conditions for the intensification of ultra-nationalist voices that associate
the western negation of voice with their non-recognition of the revolution of
30th of June, 2013. It also makes it harder for local human rights
advocates and activists to press the government for accountability for its
human rights record because they have to contend with a discourse that points
to the west’s double standards in whose rights and voices count.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.

openDemocracy 50.50

100% independent media covering gender, sexuality and social justice – worldwide. Today we need this more than ever. Every £1 goes into producing and publishing more in-depth and critical journalism, commentary and analysis from women from around the globe. Contribute today.

Tracking the backlash

Growing and globalising networks of conservative and fundamentalist groups are pushing back against our sexual and reproductive rights. 50.50 investigates.

50.50 columnists

Tiffany Kagure MugoAFRO-SEXUALITY SPEAKEASYTalking about sex, sexual identity and sexuality in an easy and lubricated way, taking some of the serious out of the sexual and reproductive health and rights conversation.

Claudia TorrisiL'ITALIA FEMMINISTAMonthly features about gender and human rights in Italy. Reporting on sexism, racism, poverty and other connected systems of oppression. Mediterranean intersectionality.

Recent comments

openDemocracy is an independent, non-profit global media outlet, covering world affairs, ideas and culture, which seeks to challenge power and encourage democratic debate across the world. We publish high-quality investigative reporting and analysis; we train and mentor journalists and wider civil society; we publish in Russian, Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese and English.